feat: KYC risk profiling, AML flagged transactions bulk review, Risk Review report & Board Resolution register

src/app/risk-review/risk-review.compute.ts

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ import {
   AmlRuleMeta,
   CTR_THRESHOLD,
   MATERIALITY,
-  NON_MITIGABLE_RULES,
+  isNonMitigableRule,
   REVIEW_STATUS_META,
   RISK_LABEL,
   RiskAlertRow,
@@ -109,6 +109,8 @@ export interface RiskCustomerRow {
   needsUpgrade: boolean;
   /** True when the rating on record is higher than the activity warrants. */
   needsDowngrade: boolean;
+  /** The review period the recommendation was drawn from, where the nightly job has computed one. */
+  behaviourWindow?: BehaviourWindowByClient[number] | null;
 }
 
 export interface RiskReviewSummary {
@@ -158,7 +160,7 @@ function recommendRating(
   ruleCodes: string[]
 ): { risk: RiskLevel; reason: string } {
   const implied = RANK_TO_LEVEL[impliedRank] ?? 'LOW';
-  const grave = ruleCodes.find((c) => NON_MITIGABLE_RULES.has(c));
+  const grave = ruleCodes.find((c) => isNonMitigableRule(c));
   const material = largestAmount >= CTR_THRESHOLD || totalAmount >= MATERIALITY.highTotal;
   const small = largestAmount < MATERIALITY.smallTxn && totalAmount < MATERIALITY.smallTotal;
 
@@ -271,7 +273,36 @@ export function riskAlertViews(alerts: RiskAlertRow[], filter: RiskReviewFilter)
  * escalated, then rated below what the rules point at, then most alerts —
  * come to the top of the worklist.
  */
-export function riskCustomerRows(views: RiskAlertView[]): RiskCustomerRow[] {
+/**
+ * The behaviour window the nightly job computed for one customer, where there is one.
+ *
+ * Keyed on client id. A customer with no window - one the job has not seen yet, or a tenant where the job has never
+ * run - falls back to the per-alert reckoning below, so the report renders either way.
+ */
+export interface BehaviourWindowByClient {
+  [clientId: number]: {
+    clientId: number;
+    clientName: string | null;
+    accountNo: string | null;
+    officeName: string | null;
+    riskCategoryAtReview: number | null;
+    txnCount: number | null;
+    distinctMonths: number | null;
+    windowFrom: any;
+    windowTo: any;
+    creditTotal: number | null;
+    debitTotal: number | null;
+    largestTxn: number | null;
+    cashTotal: number | null;
+    alertCount: number | null;
+    strCaseCount: number | null;
+    suggestedDirection: string | null;
+    suggestedCategory: number | null;
+    suggestionReason: string | null;
+  };
+}
+
+export function riskCustomerRows(views: RiskAlertView[], windows: BehaviourWindowByClient = {}): RiskCustomerRow[] {
   const byClient = new Map<number, RiskAlertView[]>();
   for (const v of views) {
     const list = byClient.get(v.clientId);
@@ -297,19 +328,53 @@ export function riskCustomerRows(views: RiskAlertView[]): RiskCustomerRow[] {
     const largestAmount = Math.max(...alerts.map((a) => a.amount));
     const escalated = alerts.some((a) => a.status === 'ESCALATED_STR' || a.status === 'STR_FILED');
 
-    const recommendation = recommendRating(
-      proposedRank,
-      currentRisk,
-      largestAmount,
-      totalAmount,
-      escalated,
-      alerts.map((a) => a.ruleCode)
-    );
+    // The server's own reckoning, where the nightly job has produced one.
+    //
+    // It is the better answer, and not because it is newer: it is drawn from a review period rather than from the
+    // alerts on this screen. A customer appears here only once a rule has fired, so judging them on those alerts
+    // alone describes the exceptions and never the ordinary months around them - which is exactly what a rating is
+    // supposed to reflect. The job also tests the things this screen cannot see at all: how many separate months the
+    // activity falls in, how long the customer has held the rating, whether an STR inside the block window forbids
+    // lowering it.
+    //
+    // Without a window - a tenant where the job has not run, or a customer it has not reached - the per-alert
+    // reckoning below still stands, so the report never renders blank while the two are in step.
+    // A window is only good for as long as the rating it was computed against. The job takes a snapshot each night
+    // and records the rating the customer held at the time; once an officer moves that rating the snapshot describes
+    // a customer who no longer exists, and the screen would go on asking for a change that has already been applied
+    // and approved. Dropping it here falls back to the per-alert reckoning until tonight's job catches up.
+    const raw = windows[clientId];
+    const staleWindow =
+      raw?.riskCategoryAtReview != null && currentRisk != null && RANK_TO_LEVEL[raw.riskCategoryAtReview] !== currentRisk;
+    const window = staleWindow ? undefined : raw;
+    const recommendation = window?.suggestedDirection
+      ? {
+          risk: RANK_TO_LEVEL[window.suggestedCategory ?? 0] ?? currentRisk ?? 'LOW',
+          reason: window.suggestionReason ?? ''
+        }
+      : recommendRating(
+          proposedRank,
+          currentRisk,
+          largestAmount,
+          totalAmount,
+          escalated,
+          alerts.map((a) => a.ruleCode)
+        );
 
     // Where the customer carries no rating there is nothing to move, so an
     // unrated customer is never counted as an upgrade or a downgrade.
     const delta = currentRisk ? riskRank(recommendation.risk) - riskRank(currentRisk) : 0;
-    const direction: RatingDirection = delta > 0 ? 'up' : delta < 0 ? 'down' : 'same';
+    const direction: RatingDirection = window?.suggestedDirection
+      ? window.suggestedDirection === 'UP'
+        ? 'up'
+        : window.suggestedDirection === 'DOWN'
+          ? 'down'
+          : 'same'
+      : delta > 0
+        ? 'up'
+        : delta < 0
+          ? 'down'
+          : 'same';
 
     rows.push({
       clientId,
@@ -332,7 +397,10 @@ export function riskCustomerRows(views: RiskAlertView[]): RiskCustomerRow[] {
       openCount: alerts.filter((a) => REVIEW_STATUS_META[a.status].open).length,
       escalated,
       needsUpgrade: direction === 'up',
-      needsDowngrade: direction === 'down'
+      needsDowngrade: direction === 'down',
+      // Carried through so the screen can show the period a recommendation was drawn from. A rating an officer is
+      // asked to approve has to show its working, and the alerts on this row are not it.
+      behaviourWindow: window ?? null
     });
   }
 
@@ -461,9 +529,13 @@ export interface RiskReviewModel {
  * the summary all run once per filter change rather than once per template
  * binding, which matters because every view reads from the same result.
  */
-export function buildRiskReview(alerts: RiskAlertRow[], filter: RiskReviewFilter): RiskReviewModel {
+export function buildRiskReview(
+  alerts: RiskAlertRow[],
+  filter: RiskReviewFilter,
+  windows: BehaviourWindowByClient = {}
+): RiskReviewModel {
   const base = riskAlertViews(alerts, filter);
-  const narrowed = applyDirectionFilter(base, riskCustomerRows(base), filter.direction);
+  const narrowed = applyDirectionFilter(base, riskCustomerRows(base, windows), filter.direction);
 
   return {
     alerts: narrowed.views,